Jason Nee Liang Huang-Kung

The court considered cross-motions for summary judgment regarding a failed assignment of a pre-construction condominium agreement.

The plaintiff sought to retain a $70,000 deposit after the defendants did not complete the assignment, while the defendants sought its return.

The court found that the plaintiff failed to seek the vendor’s consent to the assignment “forthwith” as required, and that the vendor’s consent documents imposed unreasonable new terms not contemplated by the assignment agreement.

The court held that the assignment agreement was null and void and ordered the return of the deposit to the defendants.

The corporate defendant, Medical Respiratory Care Inc. (MRC), brought a Rule 21.01(1)(b) motion to strike the action against it, arguing the Statement of Claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action due to "conjunctive-disjunctive" pleading regarding the contract parties (Mr. Tiltack and/or MRC).

The plaintiff argued there was a live issue as to who the contracting party was.

The court dismissed the motion, finding the pleadings were not flawed given the ambiguity of the contract parties and that the motion was tactical.

The court issued a costs endorsement following the dismissal of an action under the anti-SLAPP regime (s. 137.1 of the Courts of Justice Act).

The defendants, who successfully moved for dismissal, sought full indemnity costs totaling over $148,000.

The plaintiff argued against full indemnity, citing various factors including the nature of the litigation, power imbalances, and procedural delays.

The court, exercising its discretion, found that full indemnity was not appropriate and awarded partial indemnity costs of $60,000 to the individual defendants and $30,000 to Cybermedia, considering the specific circumstances and issues raised by the plaintiff.